After the first Test loss to Australia there was a lot of talk about England not leaving enough balls and being unable to bat time. They should do the opposite and look to score more off those deliveries so they can put the pressure back on the home side.
England fell into the same trap that many touring teams have in Australia by playing with too straight a bat face and not counterattacking deliveries aimed at the top of off stump and just outside.
This is extremely important in a pink ball Test if you bat first. Yes, you need wickets in hand when you enter the twilight phase but its more important to have runs on the board when you do.
With a lot of pink ball Test matches going only four days the quicker you can get to 350 the better chance you have of winning the Test which means you have to be able to counter attack
It’s better to look to score quickly rather than have a mindset of occupying the crease because when you’re facing Pat Cummins, Mitchell Starc, Josh Hazlewood and Nathan Lyon, sooner or later they’re going to get you.
We saw that with Joe Root in the first innings at the Gabba – he had to play at a perfectly placed delivery from Hazlewood, got a nick and was on his way for a duck. That can happen to the best batters in the world and Root is certainly one of those.
But most of the other English dismissals during the first Test were examples of batters being too tentative on off stump and playing with a straight bat and either being squared up or edging conventionally when the horizontal approach would have been a far better option.
Touring teams when they come to Australia, particularly at the Gabba, make the same mistake of playing vertical-bat strokes when they should be pulling or cutting the ball from off stump.
You need to be looking to play aggressively – part of England’s problem was paying the Australians too much respect. If you’re not turning the scoreboard, and the strike, over then you’re not forcing them to change their tactics or Cummins to shuffle the bowlers around.
Because they’ve proven time and time again they will get you with a good ball and you’re likely to get yourself if you’re defending at a ball you can score off.
If you keep letting balls go you are denying yourself scoring opportunities. Batters start to second guess themselves and it blurs decision making. You’ve got to find a way to score.
With the second Test in Adelaide being a day-nighter, that means they’ll be facing a pink ball that swings more and whether it’s Jhye Richardson or Michael Neser coming in for Hazlewood, they’ll still face plenty of deliveries in that off-stump corridor.
They’ll be rolled for small scores again if they keep playing with a defensive mindset and look to drive the moving ball instead of taking the horizontal route. A good late weight transfer with intent is the key.
A lot of the time in Brisbane you could see the English batters made very early decisions to let the ball go.
People sometimes question the exuberant and aggressive way that Marnus Labuschagne and Steve Smith let balls go and think ‘why do they bother doing that?’ But they’re actually making their decision really late to leave, play defensively or aggressively and thus deal with the moving ball and threats more effectively.
Marnus Labuschagne. (Photo by Bradley Kanaris/Getty Images)
If the bowlers are a foot, wide or short or full, they’re in a position to take advantage of that without second guessing themselves. They play the moving ball better than the English batters do in Australian conditions as they don’t commit until the last split second.
You could see the game turn briefly on day one in the first Test when we saw in that brief cameo from Jos Buttler in the first innings that if you play with intent, you put pressure back on the fielding team and even if you do nick one, the ball tends to go over the slips.
I’d be bringing Jonny Bairstow back into the side and would prefer Liam Livingstone as well. Both are exceptional pullers of the ball and score quickly – it might be left field but that’s what is needed to compete in Australian conditions.
Bairstow’s Test record is probably not what it should be with his talent. I’d open the batting with him, getting him out to hurt the scoreboard. He doesn’t open in first-class cricket but he does in white-ball games for England.
Batting time is overrated, the name of the game is scoring runs.
If you’ve got Bairstow at the top of the order, he can play horizontal shots like he does in white-ball cricket. Tell him to play his natural game rather than looking to play the perfect front-foot defence.
Touring teams continually do that, commit the front foot early, overstride, they’re defence-orientated and the Australian quicks go thank you very much.
Players who have done well like Faf du Plessis and AB de Villiers have kept the scoreboard ticking over and have also put their teams in a position where they can win the match.
Travis Head showed the spoils of good intent. It was great to see that scoring in the channel was still an option for Travis after it being an issue previously. He was rewarded for challenging the bowlers with a horizontal bat face and was able to defend or leave late thus dealing with danger.
If you’re defence-minded, you commit early, you’re worried about not getting out and just playing straight, you’re already committed to a shot and someone like Cummins who moves the ball half a bat width every time brings the edge into play.
Cummins, Hazlewood, Starc and Lyon for longevity as a quartet, and with more than 1000 Test wickets between, them are probably the best four-man bowling attack of all time.
How are you going to get to 350 to give yourself a chance to put the pressure on the opposition?
Are you going to let Lyon bowl in long spells to give the fast bowlers a rest and they’ve now got a genuine fifth bowler who is on the cusp of something great with Cameron Green.
They’ve got to find a way of scoring and to me that’s on top of off stump, looking to play with a horizontal face.
England dodged a bullet in Brisbane with Smith missing out. Australia are going to be harder to beat in a lot of ways in Adelaide, especially if Smith gets in the runs.
Through the pandemic Australia missed out on the 12-14 Tests that they have been used to playing every year and the likes of Smith and David Warner have been starved of consistent red ball matches and prep that usually allows them to slip easily between red and white ball. Though, I’m not seeing anything that suggests there’s a problem or England have figured Smith out and I expect him to continue to dominate.
Got a question? Please feel free to leave in the comments below.
Could someone maintain a spot in a high level T20 team predominantly on the basis of their fielding?
I think they would have to show the ability to improve in either batting or bowling to maintain their place. Players are becoming more athletic which makes it easier to improve the fielding. Batting and bowling need more work, even with the athletes, to improve and the opposition has a greater say in those two disciplines.
Mike
Guest
JGK - I think you could be right. Cummins may get to 100 but it's a big ask. Having said that, Lillee is a great, sitting on the top shelf, yet Anderson at 166 tests, isn't - in my book. Quite good for a very long time or the best for a shorter time? Which is preferable? Bradman only played 52 tests (but over a long period - the war, less tests played etc). In my time of following Test cricket (a tad over 50 years now) I'd have my best Aussie bowling quartet from that period as Lillee, McGrath, Cummins and Warne. The cream of the cream. Others that were fantastic - Bruce Reid (but his body let him down), Thommo and Johnson (similar - when they were hot nobody was better but not quite consistently great as my top 4 - both were match winners on their day), McDermott and Merv (both very underrated by history), Gillespie (a bit the same as the previous two), Harris (now he was a potential great - just didn't get to have him for long enough did we?), Lee (don't know how to rank him. Very fast, had some great days, but a bit "Starcy" - expensive and had to be carried at times), MacGill (ten years earlier or later would've had him at a greater standing), Maxy Walker ( a bit like Lawson, Siddle, and others that were good solid support Test standard bowlers), Alderman (wow! if he'd been born a Pom he'd have a record that'd smash Anderson's), Hogg (he was brilliant in that Ashes when WSC was going - really great). It's a shame we didn't see more of Pattinson. Who have I left out? So many solid bowlers like Geoff Dymock, Mallet and Yardley. Hazelwood I have up with the really good ones (Gillespie, Thommo, Harris), Starc is a slot below. lyon is the best offie we've had in my lifetime - I just prefer seeing Australia with a leggie! Overall for me, the four of Lillee, OhhAhh, Cummins and Warne are the best over the last 50 years for Aust.
JGK
Roar Guru
Cummins won’t get Close To 100 tests. He’l be lucky to beat Lillee’s 70.
Rossi
Roar Rookie
Very interesting stat's Mike, I knew Cummins was good but didn't realise his numbers were actually better (though obviously ooh aahs are over a much larger amount of tests). I actually prefer to watch Patty, has more pace. And Lara just seemed a better bloke than Tendulkar, and was the only batsman I saw slap Warne around (and consistently) too. I also think Ponting is unfairly left out of that conversation too, in a big game you could set your watch to a punter ton
peterj
Roar Rookie
What do you mean? It's obviously Lara :silly:
Mike
Guest
Pat Cummins (35 tests) averages 4.8 wickets per test, 21.23 per wicket and a strike rate of 46.3 balls. G McG (124 tests) was 4.5, 21.64 and 51.9. Hazelwood (56 tests) is 3.8, 25.63 and 56.0 I think this shows that Hazelwood is good but a step below Cummins and McG. If Cummins can keep his body going to be a 100 test player, and keep his performances up whilst being captain, then he'll be the equal of McGrath - or maybe even better. It might be down to personal choice as it is when people talk of Tendulkar and Lara. I admire both but for some reason have always been a Lara man. In my mind, he was far more dangerous. That's my choice.
Jacko
Roar Rookie
It dont matter how you make them. Ask ben Stokes if he hated scoring a 5 off his bat from a throw in the WC 50 over final. Lets also remember that Aus got beaten in that series v India ( Pujara )
Rossi
Roar Rookie
There's no way India win last year with McGrath and Warne bowling. As good as Cummins and Hazlewood are, McGrath was even better
matth
Roar Guru
I agree with most of that. The most recent loss to India was in the bowlers for mine, however the previous loss was due to batting problems in the absence of Warner and Smith and pre Labs. Not much the bowlers could have gone there. Remember that the McGrath/Warne attack and the 80’s Windies both got to bowl with the benefit of pretty significant scoreboard pressure
matth
Roar Guru
Not by cutting balls from the top of off stump
NeutralSee
Guest
Interesting suggestions. Opening with Bairstow instead of Burns, with Livingstone at 3 and Malan at 5 and giving them full license to attack, could either result in 10/2 or 110/2 ... better to try instead and die wondering...
StevieJ
Roar Rookie
Can't say I agree everything but interesting read Trent. However, I must say this article could have used a bit more editing. Some very awkward sentence construction and random commas strewn throughout.
jameswm
Roar Guru
Interesting...
The Sports Lover
Roar Rookie
Agree Mike. My eyebrows lifted when I read Trent’s claim on our fast bowling quartet. The most effective fast bowling team I’ve seen belonged to Clive Lloyd’s magnificent 1984 - 85 touring party. From a batsmen’s point of view there was nowhere to hide. No relief from fast, hostile and accurate deliveries. Survival was the goal. I rate Cummins and Hazelwood right up there with Australian greats (but below Lille and McGrath), and it’s possible that both these bowlers could yet break into the legend status if they continue their current form especially outside Australia over the next five years.
Jacko
Roar Rookie
Pujara made a hell of a lot of runs.
Marty
Roar Rookie
Hmmm, sounds a bit like the old ‘hit out or get out’ to me. Interesting approach to take in test cricket. Not sure where the figure of 350 came from. Might as well have picked 750 because if the poms go out playing horizontal bat shots from the get go they’ve got about as much chance of making one score as the other. It’s a five test series, I would have thought focus at the start would be to score runs, but at the same time spend time in the middle to get used to the conditions as best you can.
Dwanye
Roar Rookie
Great break down mike
Mike
Guest
"Cummins, Hazlewood, Starc and Lyon for longevity as a quartet, and with more than 1000 Test wickets between, them are probably the best four-man bowling attack of all time." Wow! That's one hell of a statement! Just from Australia in recent decades - McGrath, Gillespie, Lee and Warne may have something to say about that. A quartet of Marshall, Holding, Garner and Roberts/Croft was handy - although, admittedly all fast bowlers. Pakistan were pretty dangerous with Imran, Wasim, Waqar and Qadir. And we could go further back through history of course. For me, a huge blight on this quartet is the fact they have lost two series at home to India, when we had never lost at home to them before. Last year Starc and Lyon were found wanting and so much was left to Cummins and Hazelwood. Lyon has been a great offie but seriously, he's not in the same league as Warne as a match winner - no insult as who is? I'm sorry but I simply don't think that the current Aussie foursome are the best Test quartet of all time. They're good and they have one bowler (Cummins) who will end up as one of greatest ever. The aforementioned Aussie quartet had two of our absolute best ever (McGrath and Warne) who are often picked in the best Aussie XI of all time. The current four lost twice to India at home and drew in England in recent years - and we're not number 1 in the world despite also having Smith, Labs and Warner all with very good test batting averages. For me Starc is very hit and miss and not as good as big Merv or McDermott (both fine test bowlers), Lyon is good but not on a level near Murali, Warne, O-Reilly, Clarrie G or a few others like Bedi etc. Hazelwood is very, very good like Harris, Gillespie, Donald, Garner, Croft, Waqar etc. Cummins is heading to be rated alongside Marshall, Lillee, McGrath, Imran, Ambrose, Lindwall, Wasim, - in fact he's probably already there. I get that "longevity" was an important word in your statement, but sometimes longevity can be confused with absolute quality. For example Anderson has longevity to his credit but for me, when rating him, his lack of effectiveness away from his English wickets and Dukes ball has been too often exposed - especially in Australia. 166 tests for 632 wickets is actually only 3.8 wickets per test - hardly up with the greats like Lillee who averaged 5.1 wickets per Test. Had Lillee played 166 Tests and maintained his rate he'd be on 830 wickets. I've digressed. I just don't rate this quartet as highly as you because the performances against India weren't good at all and could/should've been better in the last Ashes - imo.
Brian
Guest
I don't know. You obviously didn't see Pujara bat for 2 whole summers without even thinking about attempting to make a run. England need a top 3 who bat time and tire the attack for Root, Stokes & Buttler. No point opening with Bairstow so Root again has to face the new ball. The more exhausted the attack is when Root comes in the better England's chances.
Paul
Roar Guru
"But most of the other English dismissals during the first Test were examples of batters being too tentative on off stump and playing with a straight bat and either being squared up or edging conventionally when the horizontal approach would have been a far better option." Gee you're drawing a long bow with this comment Trent. The gist of what you're saying is absolutely right. England need to bat with way more intent, to force Australia in changing their bowling plans, field placements, etc. Where I have an issue is suggesting paying more horizontal bat shots in Brisbane would have helped them. That was a tough pitch to play traditional shots like the cut & pull. On top of that, the bowlers, especially the Aussie bowlers weren't giving the length or width to successfully play what is essentially a shot across the line. I can only think of one wicket Australia took, where an English batsman should have played a cut or hook and that was Pope in the second dig, where he failed to get on top of a short ball from Lyon and dollied a catch to Smith. I do have a question about coaching. Chris Silverwood has resigned as England Test coach on the eve of the Adelaide Test and you've been given his role. What specific things would you work on with the following players; Burns & Hameed Ollie Pope Jos Buttler; and Jack Leach
Derek Murray
Roar Rookie
And it looked good. That Fredricks ton was one for the ages